jhb171achill

WARNING - LONG POST! This is a big story with many aspects. I will comment on them broken into the main issues of cultural background first, followed by the practicalities faced by promoters and (once opened), operators. The single biggest takeaway, for those who prefer not to read major tomes of stuff, is that experience and reality show clearly that there is not, as already stated, even a fraction of the interest here as seen in Britain. So before going on, why not? Many of the comments on other posts are correct, albeit one controversial; while it is not, and never was, a prevailing majority view that "the British built the railways", or worse, "the British built the railways to control us", amongst let us say, the less educated in rural areas, you would very occasionally get views along those lines. We may dismiss these instantly, as only a small minority would ever have taken such views, and they are as crassly, abjectly and completely wrong as they are downright pathetic. I have had that told to me personally (once!) by someone of a rural disposition; he was surprised when I stated the ACTUAL history behid our railways' construction, to say the least. So, moving on to preservation. To operate a preserved railway, before you even put pen to paper you need a potential MARKET. No matter how enthusiasts might wax lyrical about a railway in a remote turf bog or up a mountain away from any significant population centre, if there isn't a ready market - not of seasonal tourists, but of LOCAL people who will populate lucrative Easter Bunny and Christmas events, it's not going to be sustainable. If it isn't sustainable, it will have to be subsidised, either by a local authority or by a rich individual. As the DCDR have found, changes in local government have led to profound changes in their attitude to anything tourism-related, especially when it comes to throwing public money (from a public who may have zero interest in said attraction). If by a rich individual, what happens when he dies - especially if he has treated the whole enterprise as his personal property, with no formal preservation society in place to run it? We have already seen personally-owned schemes struggle into oblivion when those who developed them age. It's a shame, but this is the first of many points of reality that the misty-eyed "ideas" people amongst us enthusiasts - and there are many of them - fail to grasp. Without a good market, don't start it. It will end up as a closed, vandalised scrapyard. Personally, I'd almost rather see something scrapped than subjected to the indignities of rust, vandalism, graffiti, robbery of parts, and other such obscenities...... OK, though, the DCDR has Belfast 50 minutes away. That's the market sorted; Whitehead likewise for the RPSI's museum (and Cultra), and Dublin, which holds some 22% of this island's entire population for the RPSI's Dublin market. So, we have a market. What's next? Volunteers, of course. These pages, and many other organs of the antisocial media, plus occasional other sources, are full of clamours such as; 1 "They should reopen the line from (population centre) to (scenic place). It would make a FORTUNE!" 2 "Why don't the RPSI / ITG / C&L / West Clare / DCDR (or others) DO something about XYZ locomotive / coach. It's a disgrace they're letting it rot!" 3 "Well, I wouldn't be interested in going to X until they get Locomotive ABC operational" 4 "It's a crime that the very last X class diesel wasn't saved!" There are, of course, answers to those questions - most of them very justifiably unsuitable for a family audience. Question 1 above - No, they SHOULDN'T reopen it. It never even covered costs when open - and that was before road competition. Any anyway, who is "they"? If it's you, dear commentator, and you want it happen, empty your wallet towards the project, start up a society, and give up all your free time to try it! Don't want to? Then don't lecture others. And no, it will NOT "make a fortune" - it will need you to fundraise to keep it afloat. Question 2 - Why SHOULD the DCDR, RPSI and all those others do anything? Will you help? Will you donate? Will you turn up every weekend in all weathers to struggle with what the RPSI's loco engineer once quite correctly described as "redundant, life-expired old equipment"? Plus the "disgrace" bit - the comeback answer is that "it's en even bigger disgrace they you are lecturing from the armchair without lifting a finger"! Question 3 - Not interested? Then don't comment. Bye bye. Or, roll up your sleeves, give up your time, learn skills, volunteer and above all get your wallet out, and restore it yourself. Question 4 - If it's such a crime, you're an accessory - because you didn't save it either! There are many many, more such comments, sometimes outright accusations, but few related to any reality; but the bottom line is the same. There are many with no interest, and some with ideas of sorts, but which are impractical for reasons of time, manpower and money. All preservation schemes on this island struggle to maintain enough volunteers to commit to weekly maintenance and operation. As former treasurer of both DCDR & RPSI over a period of over 25 years, I can attest that in both organisations there were individuals who usually deliberately did not claim expenses to which they were entitled - in some cases quite significant sums of money - and several who privately donated personal sums to each society. But such people may be numbered on the fingers of one hand across this island. On one occasion in the 1990s, a member approached me and told me that he was prepared to donate €60,000 to the RPSI if a certain locomotive was next to be restored. An engineering assessment was conducted and it was discovered that the loco in question was in a much worse state than it looked, and the cost - thirty years ago, remember - would be three to four times that much. Our member was a very wealthy man - I knew that as he was a customer of the bank I worked in - but the poor fella died of cancer before any thoughts on this scheme were carried further. Now, in Britain, such people are thankfully two a penny, and involving sums with several zeros after them in comparison to the above. We simply don't have that, end of. There is utterly no point in pretending otherwise. Grand ideas and wish lists are emotionally-driven. Actual successful, sustainable preservational operation is different. Emotion and practicalities are oil and water. So, having started this bit on volunteering, let's get on to money. Preservation is eye-wateringly expensive. Locomotives - be they steam, diesel, or propelled by fairy dust - cost a huge amount to keep in traffic. Steam engines require lengthy periods out of traffic for legally-required boiler lifts, inspections and so on. And, they need specialist knowledge. Carriages need to be fully compliant with modern health and safety standards, as does track. The days of sticking some sort of oul temporary bit of track down and running anything that will move "Sure it's just a few hundred yards" are all gone. There WAS a time when that would do, and it's a miracle nobody was badly injured or worse - but that's rightly gone now. I personally recall a near-miss on preserved property in which a volunteer very very narrowly missed death; I saw another which could have also resulted in at least severe injury, and I am aware of another where a volunteer was badly crushed. I also recall the period (about 20 years ago) when health and safety matters, hitherto not fully taken seriously when off NIR or IE property, were being gradually introduced. In RPSI Dublin, RPSI Whitehead and Downpatrick, and at one other site too, some volunteers actually left, in one or cases unfortunately on bad terms, as they felt that new rules were spoiling their enjoyment of their hobby and were too draconian. "Sure we don't need all that - we're not Irish Rail"; and "Yer man* is being a dictator - I'm away!" (* = the (volunteer) H&S person at that place) - were just two of the comments I heard. A shame, yes, bad to lose them, but a perfect example of how emotion and practicality will come into conflict - the latter MUST always in, for the safety of all. So - location, market, volunteers and finance. Omit one, and the scheme is guaranteed to fail. Where does this leave us? Stradbally and Dromod: operational many years now. Both are sufficiently small that their low cost base, and the low number of volunteers necessary for a public operational day make up for their comparatively less population hinterland market, when compared to Whitehead, Dublin and Downpatrick. Thus, they are sustainable as currently operated as one is easily accessible from Dublin, and the other is on a main line railway line. Plus, they have enough (more than enough?) equipment on site, and of an interesting variety, to be sustainable. Setting up a new one? There's nothing left. Say we all clubbed together here and bought a 2 mile bit of the Croom Branch. What will we run on our "heritage" railway? A redundant 26 class railcar from Cork? Hardly fits the image. OK, you might say, the public don't care - a beautifully restored 0.6.0 with gas-lit six wheel carriages are an "old train". A 1990s IE railcar is also an "old train". Fine - but they won't be queued out by enthusiasts. I'm going to pause this now, and when I come back later I will discuss the various schemes I was involved with research for, back in the day, and what the pros and cons were for each. Tis dinner time, and I've a three-year-old to mind for a couple of hours. And yes, he knows the difference between a 29 class, an ICR and a DART; gawd help him. Exactly. Local business interests too, and in the west of Ireland the larger cattle dealers also had a big hand in it.

Downpatrick is really playing a blinder here. ….and this from a dyed-in-the-wool steam-head! (Though I’ve a soft spot for “C”s and 121s, but don’t tell anyone…) Very well done; the DCDR and ITG will be the (only) flag-bearers for 5’3” gauge into the future - as such, they deserve all the support we can all give.

That was indeed one of the potential schemes proposed.

Reading this with interest. During the twenty-odd years I was heavily involved in RPSI operations, and either on an operations committee, the main management committee, or both, quite often people would submit requests to the RPSI for information regarding potential heritage operation schemes. I usually offered to answer these, and while they were not initially my direct area of remit within the RPSI, they were no-one else's either. I was thus involved in quite a few investigations of potential schemes, almost all of which were very clearly non-starters from day 1 - for example, two wealthy non-enthusiast businessmen who thought that a line of 10 miles with 2 locos (steam) could be financially self supporting and make them a fortune. I will post detailed details in the coming days. I had actually planned to write a lenghty tome on the realities of railway preservation here in general, to hopefully make a few points of use to those who often suggest various schemes - as to what must be done, rather than what one might like to do; the necessity for practicality and realism (and lots of money) over emotional hankering about the past - or worse, ideeas that if the Severn Valley can carry thousands on a weekend, so can we. There's a huge, huge lot behind railway preservation here, which anyone in Downpatrick, Whitehead, Inchicore or Dromod places can attest!

Yes, indeed. In the normal course of things, LNWR design does not fit well - like most British designs - with anything here; in this case, largely due to the panelling. However, some ex-LNWR stock DID end up with the GNR, so those designs DID run in Ireland. The DNGR, of course, had similar designs of panelling (though not roofs) in their stock, though it was (almost) all six-wheelers. CIE ended up with something of ex-LNWR origin, I think - but I would have to try to find the details. In a related matter,the NCC had many coaches of pure (English) Midland Railway design.

Superb. You've persuanded me to fish out this book and re-read it again! A most interesting line!

Taken from the car on an autumn day in 1960, branch engine 472 is spotted along the roadside section outside Castletown West with the Dugort Harbout connection into the Castletown to Tralee goods.

On a summers day in 1966, the mid-day train arrives with a very clean B165. . Almost twenty years earlier, in summer 1947, ex-CBSCR No. 472, allocated to the Dugort Harbour branch in 1943, is seen with fair day sheep traffic.

Saw this on the wall in a restaurant in Kinsale the other day. Anyone know anything about the photo, the accident, or the collection it is from?

Fair day, July 1957, and A30 approaches Dugort Harbour to collect five loaded cattle trucks….

I’d be very interested in those outer-skinned GSR vans, as they were one of my grandfather’s designs!!

Brilliant. The texture and colour of the tree trunks, being 100% natural, looks 100% real. We see many model trees with really convincing shapes and foliage, but shiny brown plastic trunks! Well done!

The whole route wasn't double.... I think at one time Killylea was, though. As for layour possibilities, they are endless. No border or no Stormont, would have meant this line very likely would have survived, certainly into the 1970s. So what would have run on it? Whatever was operating on the GNR main line under UTA and NIR is the answer. It's unlikely Inny Jct - Cavan would have survived anyway, as there's nowhere between Mullingar and Clones of note except Cavan. So, you'd be looking at either portadown to Armagh as a branch, or possibly an extension to clones, where it would meet the Irish North. It is hard to see any CIE activity in Killyleagh, but if you switch locations to the INW, and assume that Enniskillen has remained, you've UTA and CIE operations sharing the Dundalk - Enniskillen line, in much the same way as Portadown - Dundalk. So by the late 60s, you're going to have ex-GNR railcars in UTA green, then NIR maroon and grey, and a Dundalk-based set of a 141 and two (probably fairly mangy!) old Bredins or laminates and a tin van. What goods there would be - another 141 and mostly CIE wagons. All in all, a nice mix. If one wants to go to a modern era, there won't be much beyond a Dundalk-based 29 class 4-car, plus an NIR 3k 3-car. You could spice it up with timber trains from forests in Co Monaghan, of course; cue the 071s! Maybe in the 1980s, fertiliser and Guinness?

Ye beat me to it!

Talking of Stradbally, I've only ever been once before, until today. The previous time I was there was in 1972! Over half a century ago....... there was no loco shed like now, the loco was bnM green, and the carriage was that low-roofed grey thing they had (at the time) on loan. They did not have the two carriages they have now, one of which contains some bits and pieces off a Cavan & Leitrim coach. An excellent day out, and many thanks to the loco crew, my friend Tom and LNER of this parish - an absolute delight to meet you, LNER. Mr. Grandson enjoyed it too; the railway indoctrination continues apace. I intend to visit again at some stage, and I will not leave if 53 years before making my third visit! I would highly recommend a visit to this little railway for all here; you'll get your chance the day of the Tailte Tours trip there in two weeks' time. They have several other locos on display including a recent Wagonmaster addition to their fleet, and in working order. Also Guinness loco No. 15, a long-term resident there.

Having seen CIE green in both fresh and weathered states, it's the same as pretty much any other colour when weathered - it takes the "shine" and richness off the base colour, leaving it "flatter" - if that's any sort of description at all.

They practically need planning permission and endless investigations and enquiries just to make their sandwiches for their lunch break here these days! As I have said before, and again I preface by saying that I very much hope to be proven utterly wrong; I suspect this whole line is simply a white elephant, conceived to please the Green Party in the last government, then conveniently ignored by FFG in future governments, as has been their past habit.

I hope you rang Joe Duffy.

This is the beauty of that era - the contrast of old and new, steam and diesel. The loco is 1880s, the vehicle behind it is a MGWR ventilated van, then (as you say) a "modern" coach - laminate or 1951-3 series; followed by an 1880s / 1890s ex-GSWR full passenger brake, as the recent Hattons Genesis model, then the wagons. Unclear what's at the end - possibly a MGWR six-wheel passenger brake.

That green is fair enough, though IRM actually have a note of the RAL code for the CIE colour. I will try to find it - I have it somewhere!

That looks VERY well! Will try that myself in due course..........

If it's a loco shed or fuelling point, or works you want, anything can be there for repairs. Just have maybe three sets of stuff - when you want to be in Britain, use those two British locos and British wagons. When you want to use steam, use the sort of rolling stock that ran with steam. When you want 1990s Irish, use a 141, Taras and anything else from that era. So, make your surroundings suitable for Irish or British backgrounds. Avoid British Rail or CIE logos on signs or sheds, so that any model loco shed could be anywhere. Avoid buses in the background which give the location away. Overall, all that should be very easy to do. What you DO need to plan properly is your track plan if you have limited space.

What locos and rolling stock do you have?

Steam or diesel? If both, maybe base it around 1960-2, and use rolling stock appropriate for that era.

That has to be one of the very best collections of anything Irish I've ever seen - and THE best UTA / NIR collection. Very well done and hope to see you back soon.